goophers: Where are these "many prisoners that didn't revolt"??? There are a handful that didn't revolt, and they are in US custody being interrogated right now. They are handcuffed, separated, and under heavy guard, BTW. There also aren't too many of them at all (13 I think), which is most likely why they didn't revolt. I don't think that you do understand the situation. When these guys "revolt", it is not like a small handful gets violent and the others just stand there doing nothing. A small handful - if any at all - stands there peacefully, while the vast majority (or all) of them "revolt". These people are utter fanatics. All of them. Only one of four applicants is allowed to join Al Qaeda, and bin Laden personally screens every individual for his devotion (used to, at least). There are no "middle of the road" Al Qaeda members. And for those who stand there peacefully - if any at all - tough. They shouldn't have joined Al Qaeda. I don't exactly have alot of sympathy for anyone who joins a terrorist group whose intent is to kill as many American civilians as possible...
You partially answered your own question. Some of these are suspected to be the LEADERS of al-quaeda. Several hundred prisoners were at the site of the first revolt. Edit: According to CNN.com, "155 prisoners had been arrested crossing border from Tora Bora ". These people are utter fanatics. All of them... There are no "middle of the road" Al Qaeda members. John Walker. I guess we should have forgotten about any information he or any other al-quaeda people can give us on bin-Laden's whereabouts, and killed a man in cold blood (isn't that what the terrorists did?)
How many do you think will want to join him when he's dead? Notice how the outcry against the US has died off since we've pretty much won in Afghanistan. These people understand force. Show them we can't be bullied, and they shut the hell up quicker than you can spit. How many were willing to die for his cause this time? Quite a few. I don't think the outcry against the US has died because they are winning. I think the outcry has died off because the US has done a good job legitimising their action, building consensus and partnerships in this war, and of being sensitive not to alienate the wrong people. The "Crusades" remark is a good example of the latter. Bush retracted it quickly, and has been careful to consult and have Arabs and Muslim spiritual leaders in high profile positions. The Brits have been very involved, at least in the media, and Canada is technically at war as well, as part of NATO. It's the brash "we're right because we can kick the **** out of anybody else" attitude that looses the US a lot of sympathy in the world. The myth of bin Laden will live on no matter what happens. In case you haven't noticed, the Arab world for the most part refuses to admit that he is a scumbag even with proof (see - recently released OBL video); they'd just see a trial as more persecution of an innocent Islamic hero by the evil US. With some people, but it's the soft support, the swing vote, if you will, that we need to be concerned about. I don't believe that the Arab world in largely in favour of Bin Laden. I know may Egyptians who are absolutely not supportive of him. al-Qaeda has committed numerous terrorist attacks in Egypt against Egyptian, including blowing up mosques. They are a fanatical terrorist group, even in the Middle East. May Arabs and Arab countries are openly against and those that are more muted in their response have other reasons, I believe. The situation in Israel is a major cause of dissatisfaction with the US right now. Kill him, and A) you never have to worry about him orchestrating any terrorist strikes again (and that's the only way to be sure), and b) those who support him will know you mean business. They were prepared to die committing the act in the first place. I don't think Bin Laden himself is a brilliant strategist. He was able to do what he did because he had money and he was able to convince a group of people that his cause was righteous. The money won't die with him. The only way to stop the movement is to debunk the sense of righteousness that drives it. This probably involves addressing more issues in the Middle East than simply exposing Bin Laden as a Fraud, and it won't be easy, but it's the approach that must be taken. What happened when the jury refused to execute Youssef and the other 1993 WTC bombing convicts? I'll tell you what happened: their/OBL's follewers saw that the Americans were weak, that they wouldn't execute those who tried to execute so many of them. They saw that there was nothing to be afraid of. So they attacked again. But they killed themselves in the process. Death does not scare them. Dishonour, I suspect, scares them. Letting bin Laden live - and have the opportunity to defend himself and possibly be freed - would be the biggest possible mistake we could make. I think it's the strongest move we can make. His actions are not supported by the Qur'an. He has killed innocent Muslims as well as innocent people from may countries. His followers have committed suicide, something strictly forbidden in the Qur'an. Let him expose himself to those who currently see him through the veil of anger and anti-American sentiment that clouds their vision now. Letting these Al Qaeda live is turning out to be a mistake too, wouldn't you say? The body count speaks for itself. Well, the Pakistani's aren't doing a very good job of containing the prisoners, and that's a problem. But it's most important to be doing everything is as just a manner as possible. Being just to our enemies "heaps hot coal on their heads." It accentuates their transgressions and reveals them for what they are, to the court of worldwide public opinion.
goophers: And in my first post in this thread, I indicated that the commanders should be interrogated. Perhaps I should have added "if possible" in there? I assumed that would be obvious... If you classify 13 people as the "many prisoners that didn't revolt", I'd have to wonder how you're getting to that conclusion... He's not a commander, and likely doesn't have any really solid info. Personally, I could not have cared less whether he was killed. Are you trying to tell me that he's not a fanatic? Grizzled: Oh, BS. So you think it's just a coincidence that it died down right as the Taliban was being defeated??? The message has been the same all along - and it just coincidentally happened to work at the very time that victory came??? I'm not saying that the message they've been putting out is not necessary - it is, in fact, the only thing that they can say politically. But if you think that the message alone has changed the Arab world's mind, then you don't understand their psychology at all. It is probably about 95% action / 5% message that has changed their mind - well, not really changed their mind, just quieted them down. If you understood anything about Arab culture, you'd understand that force is respected, and fear is a valid tool. Why do you think so many strongmen are in power in the Islamic/Arab world? Uh huh. Sure. And that video released sure changed alot of minds, didn't it? The "swing vote" is a small minority - those who are actually halfway logical, and who are not hopelessly biased against the US. They are not a majority in those parts, as I would hope that their response to the OBL video would have showed. Most of them think it was faked. Right boy (I know he's lurking here somewhere ) I think you underestimate the depths of denial that exist in the Arab/Islamic world. Never underestimate the power of self-delusion. Most were. But this will make those who aren't 100% for dying for Allah from the beginning think twice before taking up jihad... I'd agree that we must include debunking his cause as a part of the solution, but that ain't gonna solve the problem by itself. As for "adressing more issues in the ME", we are not going to capitulate to his and others' demands (leave Saudi, leave the Gulf, stop supporting Israel and let the Arabs kill them). They are just going to have to learn to live with that. Or not live with it... As for leaving Saudi, we can accommodate them on that one when we're finished with Saddam. Death does not scare all of them. But many of these fools who have taken off to Afghanistan since Oct 7 did not actually want to die in battle, they intended to win and live. If we show them that they will die and lose, then they might think twice before joining the jihad against us. Again, they respect force, and see compassion and mercy as a weakness. You mean like he did on the video that was just released? Again, I don't think you understand: the Islamic world (populations, at least) is for the most part not listening to and will not trust anything that comes from the US. They will see any conviction of OBL as a fixed case against an innocent man. The denial runs deep. And again, what if he walks? No, in their eyes it exposes what they see as weakness. They do not have concepts like "love thine enemies" and "turn the other cheek". They see such ideas in a much different light than we do; in their eyes they are acts of weakness, not acts of virtue as we see them. Just like they have a different interpretation of OBL's guilt, despite evidence, they have a different interpretation of what we would consider mercy or compassion. To us it's a virtue, to them it is weakness.
treeman, Oh, BS. So you think it's just a coincidence that it died down right as the Taliban was being defeated??? The message has been the same all along - and it just coincidentally happened to work at the very time that victory came??? The war was over before it started. The US and NATO against Afghanistan, who do you think is going to win? I'm not saying that the message they've been putting out is not necessary - it is, in fact, the only thing that they can say politically. But if you think that the message alone has changed the Arab world's mind, then you don't understand their psychology at all. It is probably about 95% action / 5% message that has changed their mind - well, not really changed their mind, just quieted them down. Well, I'm not an Arab or a Muslim, but I know Egyptian, Lebanese and Syrian Arab Muslims. And, I know Persian, Turkish and Pakistani Muslims. And, I know Egyptian, Lebanese, Palestinian and Iraqi Arab Christians, so I have some exposure to who they are and how they think and the picture you're painting doesn't match my experience. On what do you base you statements about Arabs and Muslims? If you understood anything about Arab culture, you'd understand that force is respected, and fear is a valid tool. Why do you think so many strongmen are in power in the Islamic/Arab world? Some would say that American meddling had a lot to do with it. Sadam Hussein and bin Laden were both at one time supported the US. Where else are there strongmen? Egypt? No. Jordan? No. Kuwait? No. Saudi Arabia? No. Syria? Probably Yes. UAE? No. Lebanon is so controlled by various militias that it's had to say who's in control. Unless you are saying that because some of these places are ruled by kings and princes they are therefore ruled by "strongmen," you're argument doesn't hold up. Uh huh. Sure. And that video released sure changed alot of minds, didn't it? I've seem news reports that suggest that it did influence some people. And I think a trial which would go on for some time and go over many of the facts, would have a much greater impact than a clip that ran for a few day. The "swing vote" is a small minority - those who are actually halfway logical, and who are not hopelessly biased against the US. They are not a majority in those parts, as I would hope that their response to the OBL video would have showed. Most of them think it was faked. Right boy (I know he's lurking here somewhere ) I think you underestimate the depths of denial that exist in the Arab/Islamic world. Never underestimate the power of self-delusion. Again, what do you base this opinion on? Some think it was faked, and of course those are the ones CNN will talk to. I don't thing the majority is as lacking in objectivity as you make them out to be. I'd agree that we must include debunking his cause as a part of the solution, but that ain't gonna solve the problem by itself. As for "adressing more issues in the ME", we are not going to capitulate to his and others' demands (leave Saudi, leave the Gulf, stop supporting Israel and let the Arabs kill them). They are just going to have to learn to live with that. Or not live with it... As for leaving Saudi, we can accommodate them on that one when we're finished with Saddam. I think that there are other forms of addressing the issues than simply capitulating. I don't get me wrong, the problems in the ME are extremely difficult and don't really see a clear solution. I'm thinking more in terms of mitigation. Maybe the US should step back and let the UN or some EU countries take the lead in trying to broker a deal between the Israelis and the Palestinians. But I'm getting off topic. My point was that many Arabs are angry with the US for other reasons, and this causes them to be more muted in their support of the US in the war against terrorism. Death does not scare all of them. But many of these fools who have taken off to Afghanistan since Oct 7 did not actually want to die in battle, they intended to win and live. If we show them that they will die and lose, then they might think twice before joining the jihad against us. Again, they respect force, and see compassion and mercy as a weakness. If the went to join the Taleban, an illiterate third world dictatorship, to fight the US, and they expected to win, they are crazy. I'm sure there are some fanatics who delude themselves into this kind of thinking, buy most Arabs and Muslims are not like this. You mean like he did on the video that was just released? Again, I don't think you understand: the Islamic world (populations, at least) is for the most part not listening to and will not trust anything that comes from the US. They will see any conviction of OBL as a fixed case against an innocent man. The denial runs deep. And again, what if he walks? I think the video was one piece of evidence. I think a trial would provide many more. I agree that there is a negative perception of US that would pose a problem, but I think there are ways to deal with that. There could be prosecutors there from every country that lost people in the attack. You could use an American Muslim prosecutor. There are a number of ways that a perceived bias could be addressed. You would have to have a strong enough case that you could be sure he wouldn't walk. No, in their eyes it exposes what they see as weakness. They do not have concepts like "love thine enemies" and "turn the other cheek". They see such ideas in a much different light than we do; in their eyes they are acts of weakness, not acts of virtue as we see them. Just like they have a different interpretation of OBL's guilt, despite evidence, they have a different interpretation of what we would consider mercy or compassion. To us it's a virtue, to them it is weakness. Islam is based on the principles of the Old Testament. It even believes in Jesus and his teaching. It just believes that he was a prophet, not the messiah. It's not as different in its beliefs as you may believe. Al-Qaeda is a extremist, terrorist group that does not represent the beliefs of the vast majority of Muslims. The IRA commits terrorist acts and calls itself a Christian group. Most of us would say that there is very little about what the IRA does that represents real Christianity. Most Islamic people would say that al-Qaeda's attitudes and actions don't represent the real Islamic faith.
Tell that to the Taliban and the poor idiots who went off to fight with the Taliban. An awful lot of people in the muslim world thought we would lose. An awful lot of people in the Western world thought we'd get pretty bloodied. Hell, an awful lot of people here thought it would be a difficult war. Hindsight is 20/20, right? On about 800 years of history and about 5 years of personal research. Yes, that's always the excuse that's given. It's all our fault. Doesn't have anything to do with the fact that most Arab/Islamic governments - even our so-called "allies" - have been spewing anti-US propaganda for 30 years. It wouldn't have anything to do with the fact that many religious leaders in the Islamic world have been telling their followers that jihad against the US is a noble thing. No, it wouldn't have anything to do with that... It's all our fault. Sure. Right. Saddam was our friend. Right. I guess we trained bin Laden, too. Right. We played Saddam off against the Iranians in order to weaken both of their regimes. It worked, and we stopped being his "friend" the second that war ended. We never "helped" bin Laden. That is just flat a lie - even he has said it's untrue. We helped the mujahadeen, as did bin Laden. We have never supported bin Laden. Just not true... But it's nice fodder for budding conspiracy theorists. Egypt, Saudi Arabia, Sudan, Indonesia, Malaysia, Algeria, Iran, Iraq, Pakistan... Every single Islamic government in the world with the exception of Turkey has a nondemocratic government. Every single one. Many of these are ruled by "kungs and princes" as you put it. They don't qualify as strongmen in your book? Then what the hell does??? You have been severely misinformed on that one. Your history/world politics/whatever teacher deserves to be fired for that one. Why don't you just do a little research? The answer will be impossible to deny if you do. I'm serious - just research the subject, and then get back to me. 5 years or so, and you'll understand. I'd love that - I really would. But as long as both sides are acting like babies with shotguns, nothing any outside actor does will make a difference. We have tried, but they haven't exactly cooperated. Besides, neither side really wants us to solve the problem anymore. Many Arabs are angry at us because their governments have been deflecting blame for every little problem in the world towards us. They do not have freedom of the press over there, in case you've forgotten, and the govts invariably put an anti-US/Israel slant to every single story they create. And I do mean "create"... Their religious leaders are also responsible for much of thew anti-US sentiment as well. See above. I'd like to hear your ideas on what specifically we should do to make them love us? It doesn't really matter what we do until their leaders stop telling them that everything is our fault. And unfortunately, we don't have much control over that. Many Arabs and muslims are not violent. But they support the ones who are, and that's not exactly helpful... Do you know who the two most popular figures in the Arab world are? Saddam Hussein and Osama bin Laden. Do you know why? Take a guess. As for the trial - never gonna happen, and I'll bet money on that. No one in Washington is stupid enough to let that happen, thank God. At worst he'll get a military tribunal and execution. Most likely his body will just turn up, or it will never be found (blown to bits). Again, I'll bet money on that. No it is not. Judaism is basically the OT, and from what I know Islam does have some OT principles, but it does not have NT teachings. Show me one, please? Where exactly did Mohammed say to "love thine enemies"? It has some similar teachings, but they only apply to believers - not to us evil infidels. They can steal from, lie to, cheat, and kill infidels, as long as it's in service of Allah. Then why are they so popular? Many muslims may not agree with their methods, and some may not agree with their ideas, but on the whole an awful lot of muslims aren't too disappointed with what happened on 9/11. Not all, of course, but a good many - I would say a significant majority in much of the Arab/Islamic world. How many pro-US demonstrations have you seen since 9/11? A handfull - ironically mostly in Iran. How many anti-US protests have you seen? Too many to count, and they're always packed. Although they have died off significantly since the Taliban fell. The sad truth is that most of the world hates us, and that is no more true anywhere else than the Islamic/Arab world. Sucks, but that's life.
Give me a break! U.S. meddling is the reason that Osama bin Laden and Saddam Hussein hate the U.S.? Maybe it's the fact that Osama bin Laden is a cold-hearted murder. When did bin Laden support the U.S.? And maybe people hate Suddam Hussein since he invaded a country just to corner the market on oil and other garbage like that. If Hussein can invade a country why is it bad for the U.S. to STOP him from doing so? The guy has been pulling off terrorist attacks on the U.S. for 10 years. This was the SECOND time he bombed the WTC Grizzled, so how exactly did the U.S.'s "meddling" bring THAT on!? And what about the people in Afghanistan who are partying in the streets after that crazy Taliban regime was wiped out?
This discussion is getting a little of track, but my point remains the same. There is no way to distinguish between al-Quaeda and Taliban troops from just looking at them. Any one of them could have a clue, or a part of a clue, about where Osama is. If they surrender, it is inhumane to kill them in cold blood. Doing so would result in outrage from countries that nominally support us. Osama will never see a courtroom because he'd rather die. That's fine with me, but those who give up need to be given the chance to. Nazi footsoldiers in WW2 were not automatically executed just because of their beliefs. Many who live to this day have changed their views and made positive contributions to society. As long as tight security is kept on these people (which shouldn't be as much of a problem now because there are fewer prisoners that will surrender) they won't be a threat. Not handcuffing prisoners, that was just stupidity on the part of the guards.
goophers: Well, we'll just have to agree to disagree on a few things, then. You distinguish Taliban and Al Qaeda by their nationality and whether they're still fighting or not. The Afghans qualify as Taliban (very few Afghans are Al Qaeda), and Arabs/foreigners qualify as Al Qaeda. Not a perfect solution, of course, but it's the surest way unless they actually tell you... And if they're still fighting, they're Al Qaeda. Personally, if I saw a white flag pop up I'd point the GLLD at it and call in an airstrike, but that's just me. Truth is, if they surrender to us we'll accept surrender. US troops don't violate Geneva Conventions anymore (My Lai was a PR disaster). And our troops will actually handcuff them... We can excecute them after the military tribunal, or hand them over to the Afghans after interrogation. Just as long as they're never set free (unless they are thoroughly deprogrammed), and aren't allowed to communicate with the outside world (to plan more attacks) I don't really care what happens to them.
treeman, I respectfully agree to the agreement on disagreeing with you. I cringe when the government performs any executions, but I think a 'legal' execution and summary executions are like apples and oranges. I don't want to violate Geneva conventions, even if this isn't a normal war. I think it would just open a can of worms. Anyways, thank goodness we're kickin' some booty over there and hopefully not too many innocent people will die. I think it's about time to let this thread die now. (I apologize for my screwed up sense of humor)
treeman, I know this is a question out of the parameter of the thread, but can you please reiterate how a FMJ .223 bullet in a Colt Match Target rifle (AR-15) is more deadly than any handgun caliber (including .45 acp)...arguing with my cousin about this regarding the "tumbling" effect...after your answer, please carry on. Thanks.
ROXRAN: Not my field of expertise, but... For starters, it's a high-powered rifle round, with a much greater amount of propellant - it travels much faster and with much greater force. If it didn't tumble it'd go right through you and just make a little BB-sized hole. But it does tumble... If it hits your body at any angle other than a perfect 90 degree angle (and it won't hit at exactly 90 degrees), it will not just go straight through you. It may actually ricochet around inside your body; instead of just passing straight through you, it will destroy several internal organs and then leave your body. There have actually been some questions raised by other NATO members whether it's too cruel a weapon to use, but those questions have been discarded as ridiculous for obvious reasons... A .45 slug will hurt too (probably kill you just as dead), but it won't do near the internal damage as a .223 FMJ, and it's internal damage that's the killer.
You miss read the posts completely. What I was saying is that many people believe that a meddling US is the reason why Bin Laden and Hussein are in power. I'll defer to treeman when he says that it was the Mujahadeen that the US supported and not Bin Laden, but the US was most certainly in bed with Saddam Hussein. And there are many other examples of the US supporting ruthless dictators around the world to too. Chile, various countries in Southeast Asia and Central America are examples. Most of these examples, I should add are from the 80's, 70's and before. I think the US has reformed its foreign policy greatly in the last decade. But let's stick to the Middle East so we don't stray too far afield, (if we haven't done so already.) Here is some background on the US involvement in Iraq. http://www.cbc.ca/news/indepth/iraq/ Most Arabs don't like Saddam Hussein. He is viscous murderer, even of his own people. So why would the US jump into bed with such a man? This is the kind of meddling people are referring to. I supported the US involvement in the Gulf war, and it was at that time that I began to realise what an extremely difficult situation the US was in, now that they are the one world power (until China develops a little more anyway). In that situation the US would have been damned it they didn't go in and damned it they did. Tough place to be in. And I didn't say anything like "the US's meddling brought on the attacks on the WTC." You need to be more careful about misquoting people on such serious topics. Let me add this. I think the US has done a very good job handling the PR in this war. And let me bring this back on point by adding this. I think that all that work and the strong foundation of legitimacy the US has built would be destroyed if it executed anybody without due process.
What do you mean "in bed with"? If you're insinuating that we intentionally propped him up, or even worse - put him in there (as a few have tried to insinuate), that is absolutely false. We used him as a weapon against Iran, and in the process tried to destabilize his regime by giving it a huge war debt. We have always hoped that someone would replace him... But if you meant something along the lines as "the US picked the lesser of two evils to side with in Ithe raq-Iran war", then that would be accurate. He obtained the vast majority of his weapons from Russia/USSR, China, and France, not us. We provided intelligence and loans - and that's about all. Just getting tired of hearing that little bit of misinformation, that's all. BTW, if the US executed any Al Qaeda prisoners in Afghanistan, no one would ever hear about it. Just to be realistic.
On about 800 years of history and about 5 years of personal research. You're not very forthcoming about the nature of your research, but I'm guessing you're a military man. I studied engineering with most of the Arabs and Muslims I know. Yes, that's always the excuse that's given. It's all our fault. Doesn't have anything to do with the fact that most Arab/Islamic governments - even our so-called "allies" - have been spewing anti-US propaganda for 30 years. It wouldn't have anything to do with the fact that many religious leaders in the Islamic world have been telling their followers that jihad against the US is a noble thing. No, it wouldn't have anything to do with that... I don't say it's all your fault. Not at all. I do not in any way hold the US responsible for the actions of a deranged extremist like Bin Laden. However, in creating the conditions that allow a person like him to have some measure of public sympathy in the Middle East, the US holds SOME culpability. Can you agree with that? Sure. Right. Saddam was our friend. Right. I guess we trained bin Laden, too. Right. See response to RM. Egypt, Saudi Arabia, Sudan, Indonesia, Malaysia, Algeria, Iran, Iraq, Pakistan... Every single Islamic government in the world with the exception of Turkey has a nondemocratic government. Every single one. Many of these are ruled by "kungs and princes" as you put it. They don't qualify as strongmen in your book? Then what the hell does??? A monarch is a monarch. A strongman is a strongman. Sometimes a monarch is a strongman. Sometimes he's not. Why don't you just do a little research? The answer will be impossible to deny if you do. I'm serious - just research the subject, and then get back to me. 5 years or so, and you'll understand. I'd love that - I really would. But as long as both sides are acting like babies with shotguns, nothing any outside actor does will make a difference. Perhaps you are right, but that's not really the point. The point is that it would remove the US from being the focal point of their anger. We have tried, but they haven't exactly cooperated. Besides, neither side really wants us to solve the problem anymore. I'll certainly agree that the situation over there is truly screwed up. I'd like to hear your ideas on what specifically we should do to make them love us? It doesn't really matter what we do until their leaders stop telling them that everything is our fault. And unfortunately, we don't have much control over that. Bypass the leaders. Use unassailable tactics. Here's one example, that may piss you off if you're a military man, or it may resonate with you. One of my Arab friends was in Riyad during the Gulf war. To my surprise he said the locals hated the American soldiers. He said they were rude, arrogant, weren't respectful to the local women, did not recognise the times of prayer and would make noise and mock people. Basically they were a**holes. And the locals would go out of their way to get into fights with them and beat them up. Most Muslims place a very high value on honour and respect. Incidents like this are extremely damaging. The opposite is also true. If the US made it a mission to have their personnel in these places conduct themselves with the utmost respect and charity toward the locals, that would send a message, and slowly begin to change the perception of Americans from the grass root up. This is a universal truth, in fact. If you look a man in the eye and shake his hand, and he is honourable and respectful, it is difficult hate him. Many Arabs and muslims are not violent. But they support the ones who are, and that's not exactly helpful... These people are the swing vote I was talking about. If you can change the minds of these people enough that they stop supporting the fanatical fringe, then you have taken a significant step in the right direction. No it is not. Judaism is basically the OT, and from what I know Islam does have some OT principles, but it does not have NT teachings. Show me one, please? Where exactly did Mohammed say to "love thine enemies"? It has some similar teachings, but they only apply to believers - not to us evil infidels. They can steal from, lie to, cheat, and kill infidels, as long as it's in service of Allah. Ask and ye shall receive. http://muslim-canada.org/minorities.html http://muslim-canada.org/islam_christianity.html … a bit of research for you. Then why are they so popular? Many muslims may not agree with their methods, and some may not agree with their ideas, but on the whole an awful lot of muslims aren't too disappointed with what happened on 9/11. Not all, of course, but a good many - I would say a significant majority in much of the Arab/Islamic world. How many pro-US demonstrations have you seen since 9/11? A handfull - ironically mostly in Iran. How many anti-US protests have you seen? Too many to count, and they're always packed. Although they have died off significantly since the Taliban fell. The sad truth is that most of the world hates us, and that is no more true anywhere else than the Islamic/Arab world. Sucks, but that's life. You do have a point here. I would quibble a bit with the extent of the to which this it the case, but there is a strong element of it present … even in my friends. Some passionately decried the attack, some weren't so passionate. Putting aside right or wrong, or whether there were any other options, many in the Middle East strongly resent the US for its support of Israel. They also have big issues around the Gulf War, stemming, I think, from several sources: the prior involvement of the US in Iraq (and perhaps the Iran Iraq War?), the sense that it was an economic war for the US, the way the Americans soldiers conducted themselves, the increased power it gave the US in the region. I think there is also a resentment of the power the US has wielded in the region for many decades. Amongst the conservative Muslims there is also a great deal of distaste for the "sex and drugs and rock n' roll" aspect of Western culture and its infiltration or their culture, particularly with their youth. It's a witches brew, with no silver bullet solution. I think any progress in addressing this attitude will be slow, but I do believe that change is possible.
I mentioned this early on after 9/11 - I've been studying military matters and terrorism for about 5 years now, with an emphasis on ME terrorism (couple of years of post-grad work on it). And I did just join the Army, but I don't ship until April 3. Only to the extant that the US is not perfect, and acts in its own interests (usually) - just like any other state. I feel that the vast majority of the blame lies with a) the ME state governments themselves, mainly for misinforming their people, deflecting blame for everything towards the US, and hoarding all wealth in their respective nations, and b) their religious leaders. Their religious leaders are, after all, the ones who are telling their followers that jihad and hatred against the West is OK, and that is totally unacceptable (and out of our control) from our standpoint. Hell, a prominent Saudi cleric issued a fatwa just the other day proclaiming that the WTC victims were not innocent... That sort of thing has to stop before anything will change. See response to Grizzled. The only monarch I can think of who is actually respected by and treats his subjects with a modicum of respect is the Hashemite King Abdullah of Jordan. For the most part the rest of the Islamic world's leaders are despised by large portions of their own populations and frequently use force to maintain their rule. There is no democratic tradition in that world... And remember why the West developed a democratic tradition in the first place: kings and princes tend to be violent a*holes. Would it? Do you really believe that if the UN solved the Israeli-Palestinian problem (an impossibility without US action, but just for the sake of argument), thatthey would no longer be angry at us? I seriously, seriously doubt that. I've heard quite different stories from a number of people who were there; they universally claimed that the Saudis were extremely hostile towards our troops, in particular our female troops (numerous documented tales of harassment there). Usually - not always, but usually - our troops conduct themselves pretty well when overseas. There are always a couple of a*holes, but that can't be helped. THAT is a universal (always a couple of a-holes)... Anyway, I've got a much better solution to that particular problem anyway: remove Saddam and get the hell out of Saudi Arabia. Leave them nothing as far as excuses go... My bet is they will still hate us. I agree, but I don't think it would be as significant as you think. That "swing vote" isn't very big in reality. But we should still try to get it, I'll agree on that. That's pretty much what I'd expect to hear from a Western Islamic cleric - they can't get away with a few things in this part of the woods. And they tend to be far more moderate in virtually all respects (including interpretation) than their Arabic bretheren. Arabic clerics are issuing fatwas against us. I am aware of their many issues with us, and they are all excuses. The real reason they hate us is that before the West arose to primacy in the world, the Islamic world was a superpower. They blame us for the economic (mainly), political, social, technological, etc decline of Islamic culture, and in particular Arab culture. There are a number of reasons for this; in my personal opinion their lack of emphasis on secular education is the single greatest problem with their society, although total inability to accept responsibility for their own actions and a lack of emphasis on iddividual rights are pretty close, too. The West really just figured these items out the past several hundred years (the Rennaissance was not just a scientific and technological revolution), but Islamic culture - again, emphasis on Arabic culture - has yet to figure it out. Until they do, they will continue to teach their kids how to recite the Koran and kill infidels, be dirt poor, and blame all of their problems on the West. (and before you say it, I realize that they are not all doing this - but the culture as a whole is).
I mentioned this early on after 9/11 - I've been studying military matters and terrorism for about 5 years now, with an emphasis on ME terrorism (couple of years of post-grad work on it). And I did just join the Army, but I don't ship until April 3. So, you were trying to string me along, eh? Only to the extant that the US is not perfect, and acts in its own interests (usually) - just like any other state … The US is not perfect, nor is any state (not even Canada ) AND the US is subjected to more scrutiny and criticism than anybody else. BUT, I think that in the past the US has been guilty of not considering the bigger picture/long term effects, enough, and has consequently taken actions that they thought were in their interests, but in the fullness of time have proved to be not in their interests. The side effects of the action proved to be more of a problem than the initial problem. Would it? Do you really believe that if the UN solved the Israeli-Palestinian problem (an impossibility without US action, but just for the sake of argument), that they would no longer be angry at us? I seriously, seriously doubt that. I wasn't really thinking in terms of solutions, more like changing the scapegoat. I think it's unfair, and problematic, to put the US in the position of constantly being the peacekeeper. It just feeds the fanaticism of those who want to hate the US. Anyway, I've got a much better solution to that particular problem anyway: remove Saddam and get the hell out of Saudi Arabia. Leave them nothing as far as excuses go... My bet is they will still hate us. That sounds like a good idea to me, and you might be right, but it could be a step towards changing opinions. I am aware of their many issues with us, and they are all excuses. The real reason they hate us is that before the West arose to primacy in the world, the Islamic world was a superpower. They blame us for the economic (mainly), political, social, technological, etc decline of Islamic culture, and in particular Arab culture. There are a number of reasons for this; in my personal opinion their lack of emphasis on secular education is the single greatest problem with their society, although total inability to accept responsibility for their own actions and a lack of emphasis on iddividual rights are pretty close, too. The West really just figured these items out the past several hundred years (the Rennaissance was not just a scientific and technological revolution), but Islamic culture - again, emphasis on Arabic culture - has yet to figure it out. Until they do, they will continue to teach their kids how to recite the Koran and kill infidels, be dirt poor, and blame all of their problems on the West. (and before you say it, I realize that they are not all doing this - but the culture as a whole is). I'm glad you added your qualifier. And you've added some detail to my historical perspective. "Fundamentalism" is a difficult problem, especially when it has nothing to do with the real fundamentals of the religion. It's present in the Christian world too … but that topic is probably best left for another thread. This has been a good discussion!
